UO-WSU New Year's Eve 2-OT Game

[chseagle]

Seems to me like the media & fans are blowing this out of proportion.

I'll let the articles do all the talking.

Cougs? celebration comes bit too early | Spokesman.com | Jan 1, 2010

Controversy Surrounds WSU Loss - KNDO/KNDU Tri-Cities, Yakima, WA |

Cougs come back, then let it get away: ‘It takes your heart out’ | College Sports - The News Tribune | Seattle-Tacoma News, Weather, Sports, Jobs, Homes and Cars | South Puget Sound's Destination

Ducks Waddle Past WSU in 2OT Kitsap Sun

Pac-10 Referees Give Holiday Gift To Oregon - College Basketball - Rivals.com

College Sports | Ducks stuns Cougars in double overtime | Pac-10 Roundup | Seattle Times Newspaper

It seems to me that no one has an understanding concerning the rules of the game. The game was not over, nor had anyone requested a timeout.

[Nevadaref]

I already posted this in another thread, but...


Look for the kid from the student section! He's the one in the red T-shirt and blue jeans.

YouTube - NVECapture.0008.mpg

[chseagle]

Originally Posted by chseagle

Concerning that fan running out onto the floor there at Beasley Cloiseum, the game management & crowd control were not doing their jobs properly. Of course, if WSU is still using the company I think they are for crowd control, this wouldn't surprise me much. Guess this means that the company needs to train it's Ambassadors better.

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

I already posted this in another thread, but...


Look for the kid from the student section! He's the one in the red T-shirt and blue jeans.

YouTube - NVECapture.0008.mpg

ESPN points out the kid coming out of the stands, but it seems like no one mentions the one player removing his shirt, except for ESPN in the video where it's highlighting the kid coming out of the stands.

Also if I remembered from the video, there were 2-3 WSU Bench Personnel that ran onto the floor after the made shot. Which is why the Technical was assessed, correct?

[icallfouls]

Originally Posted by chseagle

Also if I remembered from the video, there were 2-3 WSU Bench Personnel that ran onto the floor after the made shot. Which is why the Technical was assessed, correct?

This is precisely the reason for the T. A few years ago the NCAA determined that the interuption put the inbounding team at a disadvantage.

It used to be that most teams would call TO after a score to set up a play. With the stoppage of the clock after each made basket (under 1 minute), it was not always the desire of the inbounding team to request a TO. The teams would practice this type of scenario, and have a play ready run to take advantage of the confusion by the players on the court. The "rushing" on the court by bench personnel interfered with this and negated the opportunity by the inbounding team.

Since it was unlikely for officials to penalize the bench personnel that would come onto the floor they would have everyone go back to the bench, put the correct time on the clock, and start the play again. While this was going on both teams would be treating this situation as a TO that was not intended. This also prolonged games in a way was not appealing to the NCAA.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by chseagle

ESPN points out the kid coming out of the stands, but it seems like no one mentions the one player removing his shirt, except for ESPN in the video where it's highlighting the kid coming out of the stands.

I don't know that the NCAA rule on "removing the shirt in the visual confines of the playing court" is the same as the FED rule. I guess I'll have to get out my rule book (only the case book is handy at the moment).

Also if I remembered from the video, there were 2-3 WSU Bench Personnel that ran onto the floor after the made shot. Which is why the Technical was assessed, correct?

A.R. 257 "when the celebration does not delay or interfere with play, the celebration shall be ignored." Didn't see the play, so I don't know if the team was hindered by the celebration.

[Adam]

Let's just say the thrower could not have inbounded the ball immediately. No timeout was requested by either team.

[chseagle]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

I don't know that the NCAA rule on "removing the shirt in the visual confines of the playing court" is the same as the FED rule. I guess I'll have to get out my rule book (only the case book is handy at the moment).



A.R. 257 "when the celebration does not delay or interfere with play, the celebration shall be ignored." Didn't see the play, so I don't know if the team was hindered by the celebration.

Bob, I've got a link below for you that shows the play. This feed of it was done by a person with a DVR that pauses then rewinds to see things a bit closer. Concerning the player removing the shirt & the fan coming out onto the floor, there is a period where it gets paused as well as shown in slow motion.

YouTube - NVECapture.0008.mpg (UO-WSU New Year's Eve game 2OT)

[Adam]

Originally Posted by chseagle

Bob, I've got a link below for you that shows the play. This feed of it was done by a person with a DVR that pauses then rewinds to see things a bit closer. Concerning the player removing the shirt & the fan coming out onto the floor, there is a period where it gets paused as well as shown in slow motion.

YouTube - NVECapture.0008.mpg (UO-WSU New Year's Eve game 2OT)

There's a link above. If Bob wanted to watch it, he'd have done so already.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

I already posted this in another thread, but...


Look for the kid from the student section! He's the one in the red T-shirt and blue jeans.

What does this have to do with anything?

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by just another ref

What does this have to do with anything?

1. It is amusing.
2. It clearly shows a fan coming onto the court during game action, even though the ball was dead following the made goal.
3. Had the team member for WSU not coming running onto the court as well, it would have been very interesting to see how the officials dealt with the situation, especially if the fan got in the way of the players from the opposing team.

[chseagle]

A couple of follow-up articles concerning the game. The first one is from the sports editor for the Tri-City Herald.

An interesting take on WSU's costly "T" - Sports: Eric Degerman | Tri-City Herald : Mid-Columbia news

The 2nd article is referenced in the article above.

3-Pointers: College hoops' technical foul rule a travesty - Mike DeCourcy - College Basketball - Sporting News

[JPaco54]

does not #11 take 3 steps to the basket at the end...no travel call?

[Tio]

This ruling was incorrect...

Per the AR 272 in the NCAA casebook

When the celebration does not delay or interfere with play, the celebration shall be ignored.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Tio

This ruling was incorrect...

Per the AR 272 in the NCAA casebook

When the celebration does not delay or interfere with play, the celebration shall be ignored.

This ruling was absolutely correct. They were unable to inbound the ball at this point. Had they called a timeout, you'd be correct.

[Tio]

Snaq - No disrespect, but I will accept the interpretation from the NCAA.

From 1/5/10 bulletin from Ed Bilik:

When a delay by a jubilant follower(s) or bench personnel before player activity has been terminated does not
prevent the ball from being put in play promptly or does not interfere with continuous play, the delay shall be
ignored, order shall be restored and play shall be resumed

If you watch the tape, Oregon did not make any attempt to inbound the ball prior to the whistle for the technical foul.